Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup • Hacker News Board

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#431

Post by tasuki » Sat, May 30, 2026, 5:57 PM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #357

tasuki wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a disaffinity for Claude Code because it's unnecessarily big, closed source (disregarding the leak), and I have a strong feeling it'll be shittified in the future because of all the investors waiting to cash out (and perhaps even earlier by vibe coding). I have an affinity for small open source tools that do one thing and do it well. But those are just my preferences and I feel a little bit like an alien :)

> it'll be shittified in the future This happens to everything from which a profit is extracted. Perhaps there's a way to fund the training of "actually open source" models, but so far we don't have that (unless you count the Chinese government).

> This happens to everything from which a profit is extracted.

Yes, hence my affinity for small open source tools!

> Perhaps there's a way to fund the training of "actually open source" models

I meant Claude Code the agent harness, not the model. Models are an entirely different can of worms!

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#432

Post by bluegatty » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:04 PM UTC

neosat wrote: post #272

bluegatty wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" You cannot simply make a claim that (model + harness) X is better than Y, but then have no discernible difference in the output" Sorry I think this misses the mark. Because it's not the output but the process. And sometimes the outcomes are not always discernable. Codex and Claude are very different. I use them for different things. Their behaviour difference is obvious. Of course it'd impossible for anyone to tell…

You need to see the response in light of the original discussion. Referencing here for clarity since I should have included it in the first place: "We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code." So the same person, was using similarly competitive tools, and showing that the output was hard t…

It's not reasonable to compare results from two different tool sets, especially as they are guided by humans.

The only way a reasonable comparison could be made, would be to compare completely automated results from either technology - that would be useful.

For example - creating a 'per-baked script' and running on both to see the output.

Codex and Claude are obviously very different, though it's hard to characterize how those differences might apply exactly to a given problem.

Two 'very different power saws' will ultimately build the same home.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#433

Post by amazingamazing » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:08 PM UTC

ethbr1 wrote: post #417

amazingamazing wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both companies don't mind weaponization. The difference is whether it should only be domestic. Both are ok with foreigners being bombed.

Do you have a citation for that? Because the Anthropic's presentation of their position doesn't have a domestic or foreign caveat to autonomous weapons. It's a categorical no. https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war

> We support the use of AI for lawful foreign intelligence and counterintelligence missions. But using these systems for mass domestic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values.

Your link

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#434

Post by duxup » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:10 PM UTC

amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

I certainly can’t tell.

I honestly think I’d need weeks of all workday testing to even form an opinion… and some in depth training before that to use each given tool right…

And then … I might decide I can’t tell the difference.

As it is I use Claude and I don’t have the time to properly compare.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#435

Post by mi_lk » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:13 PM UTC

Jcampuzano2 wrote: post #193

ctvo wrote: post #104

I think Sam Altman is an asshole and I prefer to spend my money elsewhere. Frontier models being commoditize is inevitable. OpenAI thinks they're still competing on technology, and not user experience and market reputation otherwise they'd understand the continuous negative PR generated by Altman's chaos is going to cost them everything.

How can you say this as if supporting Dario is any better. At the top level of anything there is almost no such thing as a non-asshole. None of them care genuinely about you they just want your money.

You have a point but I think you might underestimate how much it takes to be a snake like Sam Altman

Not that I have first-hand knowledge but if reports about him are only half true, most tech CEOs are already saints compared to him

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#436

Post by 999900000999 » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:13 PM UTC

testfrequency wrote: post #241

999900000999 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>More to life than money! That's why I want to make enough to retire early! In my 20s I wanted to retire by 40. In my 30s I want to retire by 45. Although I'm starting to understand the journey is just as important as the destination. I do have a fantastic low stress job currently.

It’s very much the journey, life is a journey. Much like learning is a life practice, so is happiness. Everything that makes you happy today will not be the same 20 years from now. The sooner you can find peace in simply being human, the more fulfilling your life will become. It’s cliche to say, but I find it honest and true. Tech culture preys on making you feel inferior if you aren't loaded with RSUs and equity, bu…

Actually, I want to make lots of money to help my friends.

I've already committed to pay for a friend's kid to attend college( within reason though, I'm thinking about 15k as that's a good headstart).

Another I occasionally help with nominal amounts. In exchange he's shown me around the world. He's basically a genius who is fluent in like 4 languages. I always respect others who can do what I can't.

That's the dream anyway. Sell your soul, then take care of your friends in an attempt to buy it back.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#437

Post by kaydub » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:18 PM UTC

mpyne wrote: post #420

kaydub wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't believe non-deterministic tools can actually be benchmarked. It's all hoopla to me. I flip between models all the time. Makes little difference. Sometimes one model is faster or better than another but there's no rhyme or reason why.

> I just don't believe non-deterministic tools can actually be benchmarked. It's all hoopla to me. We benchmark non-deterministic things all the time and it's frankly not even that unusual or hard. You yourself indicate that one model outperforms another one in your experience on various facets, and that is itself a benchmark. The more relevant question is probably how well does a given benchmark translate to improve…

My anecdotal experience isn't a benchmark. Just because I feel like something is better or different doesn't mean it actually is.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#438

Post by lysace » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:20 PM UTC

nzoschke wrote: post #428

lysace wrote: post #12

The models aside, my impression is that Anthropic is winning in large part because of very pragmatic and high-velocity product development on top of them; like with Claude Code. Like actually iterating hard to make them useful. Many, many details matter here. I haven't tested the similar OpenAI/Google tools in detail lately though. Previously I found them way too generic and unpolished to be useful. Is there somethin…

My impression too. Claude Desktop, Cowork, Code, Design all get meaningful new features week over week. I can’t recall another vendor with such focus and velocity. Google products are evolving at a glacial pace. OpenAI isn’t as focused on what knowledge workers need.

Velocity: The closest is perhaps NCSA Mosaic/Netscape in 1993-1995. It's exhilarating to follow.

Both Google and OpenAI appear to be stuck in some abstract strategy where they keep shipping new demos instead of iterating on actual products.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#439

Post by brookst » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:20 PM UTC

tasuki wrote: post #229

brookst wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like saying you gave a Taylor Swift fan sheet music from 1984 and from Michael Jackson’s thriller and they couldn’t tell the difference. I have a strong affinity for Claude Code because of the interaction experience and overall tone / vibe / process. I am 100% willing to believe the code it produces is identical or possibly less good than Codex. I enjoy working with Claude in a way I just don’t get from OpenA…

I have a disaffinity for Claude Code because it's unnecessarily big, closed source (disregarding the leak), and I have a strong feeling it'll be shittified in the future because of all the investors waiting to cash out (and perhaps even earlier by vibe coding). I have an affinity for small open source tools that do one thing and do it well. But those are just my preferences and I feel a little bit like an alien :)

I hear you. I’m just in the camp of using the best tool available today, and if things change in another tool becomes better(either because the new tool is an improvement, or because the old tool gets worse) then I will switch.

Perhaps because I am notoriously terrible at predicting the future. I gave up on that after passionately and exhaustively trying to convince everybody I knew that OS/2 was the future.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#440

Post by Aurornis » Sat, May 30, 2026, 6:32 PM UTC

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #337

Aurornis wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. > Couldn’t tell. Why would you expect them to be able to recognize the signature of a model from a pair of PRs? I don’t understand why you think this is a useful test for anything when we have numerous benchmarks that run 100s of tests on model…

Kind of orthogonal to the discussion, but could you broadly describe the code you're working on that both models are bad at? One thing I'm still struggling with is figuring out what types of code LLMs can vs cannot write.

> Kind of orthogonal to the discussion, but could you broadly describe the code you're working on that both models are bad at?

Commonly, anything that hasn't already been done across 100 different projects on GitHub.

Making a React app with a CRUD backend: LLMs are great. They've been trained on this.

Doing new work on complex non-public codebases or in niche problems that aren't commonly solved: Completely different story. Some times they'll find enough information to piece together a path toward a solution, but that doesn't mean it's a good solution. I also have to feed in a lot more context and even stop them when they go down bad paths frequently.

For the complex work I don't have the LLMs write code, but I may have them do a proof of concept. I have to write and understand everything myself. There are times when I'll think the LLM output looks good until I go through it line by line and realize it's done something completely unnecessary, or happened to get the right result for the wrong reasons. For unknown problems they're good at getting something to work through brute force if you let them consume enough tokens, but it may rely on safety fallbacks from the OS or fallbacks instead of being a proper solution. I always chuckle when they encounter intermittent errors and the first idea is to add a retry mechanism so the error is ignored.